The potential drawbacks of open peer review.
A simulation model of scientist behaviour
Flaminio Squazzoni & Federico Bianchi
GECS-Department of Economics and Management
University of Brescia, Italy
[email protected]
www.gecs.unibs.it/squazzoni.html
PEERE Valencia 2016
Research question
Transparency is viewed as a means to avoid selfish behaviour
by scientists and increase science accountability and
credibility
This is true, in principle, but the devil is in the detail!
PEERE Valencia 2016
The basic model
A population of N agents (authors & referees)
Resources, productivity and quality
Evaluation process: intrinsic vs. perceived quality
Publish or perish
PEERE Valencia 2016
Play with our NetLogo model!
https://www.openabm.org/model/4718/version/1/view
PEERE Valencia 2016
Transparency implications
PEERE Valencia 2016
Dynamics
PEERE Valencia 2016
A conflict of values?
Is science community a society of peers or is it based on a
hierarchical stratification?
Next step: adding reciprocity strategies that are sensitive to
hierarchy and status
Does transparency challenge justice?
Does “respect” question the “truth”?
Is transparency a dangerous social experiment imposed
without any control factors?
PEERE Valencia 2016
PEERE Valencia 2016